![]() ![]() ![]() Is indeed not a deal-killer, BUT that simple statement glosses over the fundamental concept I would point out, which is that programming languages are not JUST languages. Those differences become the responsibility of the developers to work around. Either on the fault of the spec writer or the language implementor, differences in the implementations arise. The goal is to make all the implementations compatible. Common Lisp, C++, C, Scheme, Haskell, ML, and EcmaScript (Javascript) all have a written document that explains in fine detail how to write a compiler (or interpreter) for the language. While every vendor agrees on (most of) the spec for the language, they feel the need to add new features to lure in more users.ģ) Allowances or ambiguities in the language spec, or failures in the language implementation. Especially "standardized" compiled languages. This is usually a bigger problem with compiled languages. But every once in a while, you run into problems where some functionality is buggy or just plain undocumented. Since most operating systems do pretty much the same thing, this isn't a deal-killer. ![]() Windowing toolkits, networking, filesystems, even basic input and output depend on the underlying operating system for support. Platform issues typically arise in three ways (listed in order of prevalence): Platform dependency is a big issue in all areas of software development. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |